I heard Mother Angela say that none of us can understand scripture until we die..
I suspect you misrepresent what Mother Angela actually said, or at least meant. I doubt she was suggesting that it is impossible for humans to understand Scripture until they die; rather, I think you and she probably agree on such matters as the use of the gifts of God to discern the meaning of Scripture; even if not fully, at least with increased understanding over time.
BUT the scriptures are clear to one that studies and prays and meditates on Gods word.
The evidence does not support this assertion. There are a lot of folks who disagree on various passages, despite the fact that their differing views on Scripture were formed honestly, through study, prayer, and meditation on God's word. As an example, even such Protestant giants as Luther and Calvin strongly disagreed on the matter of the Real Presence in the Lord's Supper.
In any case, your assertion that Scripture is "clear" to those who study and pray, is directly at odds with your statement that "NO ONE can infallibly interpret scripture."
The inability to have complete understanding is not an excuse not to trust the indwelling Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth and pick up our Bibles and read
But by the same token, that same inability to have complete understanding brings to light the danger of trying to define on an individual basis what constitutes Christian truth. It is simply not adequate for each of us to pick up our Bibles and come up with our own answers, hoping for the best.
There still needs to be a way to resolve the disputes that inevitably arise; and as to that, ArrogantBustard put it so much better than I could.....
I am not in the habit of misrepresenting the words of others..her exact words paraphrased were were we can not understand the words of scripture until we are in heaven, as an example she cited why Jesus would say "I am the bread of life" and have it mean one thing and say " I am the vine or I am the door"' have a different meaning
Poor think does not realize the problem is not the word of God..but the translation HER church puts on the words..
I am sorry if anyone has a problem with the clarity of scripture..but to be frank that is their own doing and not Gods.. Scripture is clear on the person of Christ, and the means of salvation..what small doctrinal differences might seem to exist are on matters not relevant to the message of the scriptures.. if it is not clear it says something about the spirituality of the person, not the word of God
1Cr 2:14 — But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.
So what? Survey every American married couple on 100 significant worldviews, and see how many they actually agree upon. I mean these couples may match up in 25 to 28 of E-harmony's 29 dimensions of compatibility, but they might be fortunate to match up on half of 100 significant worldviews.
Would we use the mismatched answers among such hypothetical couples, the way you have done repeatedly on this thread, to call into question that there is no "real right worldview" to be had on those questions?
And BTW, I've stated this in the "negative"; were I to state this in the "positive," just think of how many things couples actually do agree upon -- a miracle in itself...and then broaden that to the nuclear family, extended families, etc.
As an example, even such Protestant giants as Luther and Calvin strongly disagreed on the matter of the Real Presence in the Lord's Supper.
Yes, but even Calvin, were you have been able to interview him, when asked if he would believe Matthew 28:20: And surely I [Jesus] am with you always, to the very end of the age." Calvin would say "yes" -- meaning he recognized the omnipresence of Christ being everywhere, including at the altar during a worship service...What? You think Calvin would say that was the only place Jesus was not?
Another "so what?" comes to us from the New Testament itself: Paul & Peter.
They were at times at odds re: how Gentiles were to be treated...should they be circumcized or not?...What about the types of food they ate?...what about the level of hospitality & open association the Jews should be showing these Gentiles in Christ?
These were all real questions of the day in the Early Church. It got to the point where the apostle Paul "opposed Peter to his face" (Gal. 2:11) over some of these issues.
To hear you tell it, you'd probably accuse both Peter & Paul (or one or the other) of being "schismatics" over these issues.
To hear you tell it, why since Peter & Paul "disagree[d] on various passages, despite the fact that their differing views on Scripture were formed honestly, through study, prayer, and meditation on God's word" -- therefore, no one, real, true position existed -- or could be interpreted -- on God's position on the matter.
Well, had you taken such a first-century commentary vantage, you would have been wrong; just like you're wrong now to be promoting your subtle Biblical relativism.
The fact is, it was over such disagreements that we get some of the most marvelous Scriptural verses we have -- verses like Gal. 2:20 + justification by faith (Gal. 2:16-21) -- which comes imbedded in a message Paul gave to his fellow Jews over these disagreements. Also, please commit Gal. 2:14 to memory over these kind of disagreeable issues in the Church: 14When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel...(Yes, Virginia r9etb, there is "the truth of the gospel" which measures our behavior!)
Here, I'll cite the passage at length:
9James, Peter and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. 10All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.
11When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
14When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?
15"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' 16know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.
17"If, while we seek to be justified in Christ, it becomes evident that we ourselves are sinners, does that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker. 19For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"